Chullin Daf 15

All right, daf tes vov, Friday's daf. We're trying to figure out which Rebbi Yehuda is the one that says that if you shochet a beheima on Shabbos, you can't eat it on that Shabbos. Yesterday we had two mahalchim. I think I misspoke yesterday and said we did three yesterday, but we actually did two different mahalchim yesterday, and now we're up to sheshis, which is going to be mahalcha number three. We're still in the world of muktza, but they're suggesting this is the Rebbi Yehuda legabei hilchos muktza, but it's a different nekuda about muktza. Picking it up six lines from the bottom of Yud Daled Amud Beis. Elo amar Rav Sheshis Breida Rav Idi, Rebbi Yehuda d'neirosi. What's the Rebbi Yehuda by neiros? DeTanya metal tin ner chadash, you're allowed to be metal tin a new ner, a new little oil lamp, aval lo yashan, but not one that was used already. Devar Rebbi Yehuda. Meaning if it was used already, it's going to be muktza cuz you have no use for it on Shabbos. And in the same way, a live animal has no mutar dikui use on Shabbos, and therefore it's muktza. This is as opposed to if the ner was a new ner, so you could use it for anything. I don't know, put your salad dressing in it. Doesn't have to be muktza. But we're assuming though that if you shochet a beheima on Shabbos since bein hash'mashos, that animal was muktza. And what kind of muktza are we talking about? We're talking about muktza machmas issur. So since Rebbi Yehuda holds that the ner is going to be muktza as you go into Shabbos. And the understanding is is because it's muktza machmas mi'us. But but in the same way, the beheima is muktza machmas issur cuz there's nothing you could do with it that's mutar on Shabbos. So if you have to give a mar but that's good for the hiluk. Amar d'Shmuel Rebbi Yehuda, muktza machmas mi'us, like by the case of the ner where it's gross. That's why you put it out of your mind to use it on Shabbos. But what about muktza machmas issur? Mi Shmuel lei. Who says Rebbi Yehuda holds of muktza machmas issur, which is what the issue would be by a beheima. Tosefos points out that really this Gemara is half a min is not to be taken so literally because muktza machmas issur l'chera is a more chamur dikui muktza than muktza machmas mi'us. The Tosefos Harash is not so convinced and it could be there's a hiluk between d'chiya b'yadim and not d'chiya b'yadim as our Gemara is going to say shortly. But either way, the Gemara is asking who says Rebbi Yehuda is also going to be maskin that the animal be muktza because of the machmas issur? To which the Gemara answers, yeah, and Rebbi Yehuda does hold of muktza machmas issur. DeTnan Rebbi Yehuda amar, moving over to Amud Aleph, kol neiros shel mateches metal tin. You're allowed to move all neiros shel mateches. It's metal lamps, which because of the nature of metal, they don't absorb the oil, and therefore it's not muktzeh machmas me'us. Chos min ha'ner she'he'lid l'gabei bo'ei Shabbos. Except for the one that was already lit on Shabbos, and it was burning into bein ha'shmashos. So over there, it might be muktzeh machmas issur altz d'kibui. And we discussed that bein ha'shmashos is k'tzai l'chulyoima. So therefore, you see that Rebbe Yehudah does hold of muktzeh machmas issur. And therefore, just like Rebbe Yehudah holds muktzeh machmas issur like l'gabei the ner that was burning in the beginning of Shabbos, so too the animal that was alive bein ha'shmashos should also be muktzeh even after it was gishacht. Which the Gemara says, "I can be docheh that because the dilma shani hatzalah d'duchi l'vei adaim. As we mentioned by the case of the ner, you're doing something actively. You're pushing away the use of this ner by lighting it. As opposed to the animal, that I'm not doing anything. I'm just The animal is just existing. I'm not being docheh b'vei adaim. And therefore, maybe Rebbe Yehudah might say that there's muktzeh machmas issur by the ner, but not muktzeh machmas issur by the animal. All right. So after three tries, we're giving up on the idea that the Rebbe Yehudah that ossurs the shchitah that day of Shabbos is altz muktzeh, let's try something totally different. Amar Rav Ashi, Rebbe Yehudah d'mevashal hi. It's that Rebbe Yehudah that says that if you cook on Shabbos, you're not allowed to eat from it. Which in other words is the ma'aseh Shabbos. And I should just point out, we're going to be talking about bishul here, but really you can extend this to other melachos Shabbos as well. Perhaps not All the melachos could be hotza'ah is not going to have a ma'aseh Shabbos. It's a chiyuv adam because hotza'ah is a melacha geru'ah. There's nothing inherently creative that you're doing with hotza'ah. You're just moving it from point A to point B. So that may not make it into a ma'aseh Shabbos. There Rishonim suggests to extend that same svara to tzad because capturing something on Shabbos There's also no creation in it. Say though, you're just putting it in an enclosed area. Al kol panim, for just about all the melachos though, there will be an idea of a ma'aseh Shabbos. Now, ma'aseh Shabbos is going to depend on a lots of different factors, and that's going to be the big machlokes tana'im here. De'is tana'im because the braisa says, "Ham'vashal b'Shabbos, if you're over on Shabbos and you cook, so the halacha is, so b'sheigeg ye'ochal." If you did it b'sheigeg, you can eat what you cooked on Shabbos. But b'meizid lo ye'ochal. And therefore, we have to wait until after Shabbos to eat it. And you have to wait until b'chdei she'yasu, that there would have been enough time to actually do it after Shabbos. That's the halacha according to Rebbe Meir. divrei Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda imer, "B'shogeg yochal b'motzei Shabbos." He's even more machmir that b'shogeg you can't eat it on Shabbos, you have to wait till motzei Shabbos. But b'meizid lo yochal l'olam. But if you did a real maaseh Shabbos b'meizid, it becomes assur forever. Rabbi Yochanan HaSandlar imer, "B'shogeg yochal b'motzei Shabbos." But there's a difference for who? L'acheirim v'lo l'eilav. Only other people can eat his cooking after Shabbos. But he can't eat his cooking at all, even after Shabbos. B'meizid lo yochal l'olam l'eilav v'lo l'acheirim. So according to Rabbi HaSandlar, it's very chomer. But he's not the subject of our discussion here. According to Rabbi Yehuda, we do see that a maaseh Shabbos will assur the achila on Shabbos even b'shogeg. So maybe that's what Rav Meir when he says "Acheil b'Shabbos lo yochal b'Shabbos" is going like this Rabbi Yehuda about a maaseh Shabbos. So freaks the Gemara, "Why are we talking about a shogeg b'nukman b'meizid?" And what will we be marbiach from Rabbi Meir? You can set sign our mishna not just like Rabbi Yehuda, but even like Rabbi Meir if he did it b'meizid cuz Rabbi Meir said that if you do it b'meizid you're not allowed to eat it on Shabbos also. Let's talk about that. It's not shiyach to say that the tanna of our mishna is going like Rabbi Meir. D'tani, "D'myei d'Yom HaKippurim." Our mishna puts together a shiyach b'Shabbos u'v'Yom HaKippurim. So my Yom HaKippurim lo yishna b'shogeg lo yishna b'meizid. There is no cheilek because it's always going to be lo yochal. Of course, the reason why you can't eat this k'shechta an animal on Yom Kippur is because you can't eat on Yom Kippur. But af al pi chein nami, here also when you're shiyach it on Shabbos lo yishna b'shogeg lo yishna b'meizid. And since Rabbi Meir does not hold that way cuz Rabbi Meir makes a division between shogeg and meizid, our mishna can't be Rabbi Meir. Freaks the Gemara, "We matzisi mukmas lo b'shogeg v'Rabbi Yehuda?" You want to set sign our mishna like Rabbi Yehuda in a case of shogeg? Freaks the Gemara, "Af al pi al pi she'hu mischaiyev nafsho." How shiyach it to say that even if you're chayav misa? Now, if you're chayav misa, that means you did it on purpose. You don't You're not chayav misa for a shogeg. To which the Gemara says, "Achi k'amar, our mishna means af al pi d'meizid mischaiyev nafsho." Even though in a case when you did do it b'meizid you'd be chayav misa, hacha d'b'shogeg shiyach it to say here where you do it b'shogeg the shiyach it will work. Hey, yes, you can't eat it until after Shabbos. Okay, fine. So it can't be Rabbi Meir. But freaks the Gemara, "B'nukman k'Rabbi Yochanan HaSandlar." D'amar lo yishna b'shogeg lo yishna b'meizid lo yochal. The whole reason why you didn't want to set sign like Meir because you can't make a division between shogeg and mezid. So Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said like Rav Meir who's super machmir is also not making divisions between shogeg and mezid. To which the Gemara answers, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said like Rav Meir who's super machmir is also not making divisions between shogeg and mezid. He makes other divisions like acher and lo leilui that after Shabbos only other people can eat from his cooking not from he himself who did the cooking. But Tanna de Dan, U'n Zera Tanna, shchitas acher k'tanei leishana lei, v'leishana l'acher. So can't be Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak. And now the Gemara tells us a little story that Tanna Tanna Kamma de Rav, the braisa was taught in front of Rav that hamivashil b'Shabbos b'shogeg yochal, b'mezid lo yochal. Like shitas Rav Meir. And what happened? U'mashtiklei Rav. But Rav said, "Shah!" So the Gemara asks, "Why did Rav get so upset?" You can't say over Rav Meir's memra. Eilu v'eilu divrei Elokim Chaim. So if you want to say that Rav holds like Rav Meir and doesn't hold like Rav Meir and v'tanna tanna k'Rebbi Meir and that tanna who was saying over the tannaim was holding like Rav Meir, so what's the problem with that? Mishum d'svara l'Rebbi Yehuda, man d'tanna k'Rebbi Meir mashtiklei? Just because Rav himself holds like Rebbi Yehuda, is that a reason for him to be mashtik someone who wants to say over mishum Rav Meir? I mean, whatever happened to Eilu v'eilu divrei Elokim Chaim? I mean, it's not such a big deal that he could say over Rav Meir. V'eid, mi savar k'Rebbi Yehuda? Who says that Rav even holds like Rebbi Yehuda? V'amar Rav Nachman bar Ami, k'mairu lohu Rav l'talmidei, when Rav would pasken for his talmidim b'tzina, like to themselves, mairu lohu k'Rebbi Meir. He would hold like Rav Meir's more meikel d'kashita. V'chi darsh b'perakav, when he would say publicly darsh k'Rebbi Yehuda, he would give the more machmir d'kalaha mishum amei ha'aretz. So Rav himself actually might hold like Rav Meir. So if Rav holds like Rav Meir, why would he be mashtik the one who's saying over Rav Meir's memra? V'chi teima tanna d'perakay tanna kamma, maybe when this braisa was being said over in front of Rav, it was being said over b'rabim. But still it doesn't really explain it because kuli alma tanna tzei tzei. You think everybody in the audience is always listening to the one who's saying over braisas b'rabim? La mairas tzei tzei. Rather than listening to the actual darshan who's saying over the braisa, they're actually listening to the person who's ibber zagging, the person who's saying over and actually teaching. Because people want to all ask their questions. You see, really the actual speaker is not the one who has the final word anyway. All right, so the Gemara says, "You know why Rav was mashtikim?" So Amar Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, this is really what happened. So Tanna Shacheit, Tanna K'Mei d'Rav. The one who sang over these brachos wasn't talking about cooking on Shabbos at all, he was talking about shachting on Shabbos. And what did he say? Ha'shacheit b'Shabbos, if you shacht on Shabbos, b'shogeig yay'achel, b'meizid yay'achel. B'achel b'shogeig amazing. Amar lei when Rav heard that, he said, "My day teich! What's p'shat? Rebbi Meir, if that's what you think is going on here, you've got it wrong because ad kan l'kashair Rebbi Meir al bishul. Rebbi Meir only had a kulah about bishul on Shabbos. Why? The royal case, because it's possible to eat the meat raw, and therefore it's not going to be muktzah. That's the issue. Aval shacheit, dein royal case. But before the animal was k'shachtin, it was absolutely muktzah because there was no way to even take a bite out of it. It's alive, and there's an aveimah na chais, so lawyer Rebbi Meir would not be maskin al the muktzah for the achilah on Shabbos. B'frecht the Gamara from our Mishnah. B'chom as nisan the shacheit to our Mishnah is talking about a case of shchitah as we know. V'omer Rav Huna darsh Chiya bar Rav Mishmei d'Rav that Rav had said assur b'chiul yom zeh that the whole day of Shabbos you're not allowed to eat it until Shabbos is over. B'nas bin Chavraya l'meimar and what did the oil men of Bais Medrash say? Rebbi Yehudah hee, our Mishnah is Rebbi Yehudah. That's the whole past day's daf. We've been trying to figure out that it's Rebbi Yehudah. But how Rebbi Meir is shari? So l'maisa, according to the Chavraya, it's only shchitah is Rebbi Yehudah and not shchitah is Rebbi Meir. So we can't go with Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak's machlokes over here that it would work like Rebbi Meir. To which the Gamara answers, k'shari Rebbi Meir, when was Rebbi Meir matir it? Turning over tamid bais k'gun sh'chayalei chailam b'yad yaim. We're talking about a new kimtah. At the time of the shchitah, there was someone who was very sick in the house. And therefore there's no muktzah issue because we needed to feed this person who was sick on Shabbos. And that's why Rebbi Meir is matir to eat it on Shabbos also. That's the case of our Mishnah. See Yachi d'mai tamai Rebbi Yehudah d'osa. Why would Rebbi Yehudah say you're not allowed to eat the meat on Shabbos? Even if Rebbi Yehudah is maskin to pikuach nefesh so there shouldn't be any muktzah issue, it was muchan going into Shabbos. And for the Gamara k'gun sh'chayalei chailah, the chivri. He got better on Shabbos. Because he got better, now you have a machlokes Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Meir whether or not the issur muktzah is poka. So according to Rebbi Yehudah, you're not allowed to eat it for the rest of Shabbos, but according to Rebbi Meir, you are. V'chi hada omer Rav Achbar Adda, omer Rav, amarlo omer Rebbi Yitzchak bar Adda, omer Rav, ha'shacheit l'chailah b'Shabbos, if somebody shachts for a on Shabbos, also lavari. The healthy person is not allowed to eat it. And Rashi speaks out, we're talking about a person who became sick on Shabbos. And if that is no shaila that you're allowed to shecht for the person who's sick. But Rav holds for the healthy person, they can't eat that day because since it was muktza for them, that healthy person was makatzdaas from the animal before Shabbos. However, hamavashal l'chaila b'Shabbos, not shchita but actually cooking for a chaila on Shabbos, mutar l'vari, even the vari can eat from it. My ta'ama, because because he could have actually chewed it and eaten it raw. But hey, ain't a royal case. But the meat that was not k'shacht and wasn't even shecht to chew, wasn't even shecht to eat and therefore it would be muktza. Amar Rav Papa, pa'amim shashech I can give you a case when the person who shechts on Shabbos will be mutar for everybody. When's that? And therefore there's no problem with muktza and there's no problem with shchita. On the other hand, mavashal ossur, I can give you a case of someone who cooks for Shabbos it's going to be ossur for everybody. When he cuts this the loss from a vine on Shabbos and then he cooks it because then it's muktza and it's maiseh Shabbos because then it's muktza going into Shabbos. Amar Rav Dimi min Arday, muktza l'vari the healthy person can also eat it raw. My ta'ama, given the efshel b'sara since you can't shecht part of an animal every part of the animal needs a full shchita. And therefore there's no muktza. But hamavashal l'chaila b'Shabbos, ossur l'vari, that cooking is only being done for the chaila and therefore it'll be ossur for the vari we don't want more cooking to happen for the actual healthy person. So the idea of being marbeh b'shiurin only exists by cooking and not by shchita. And the Minchas Chinuch actually asks it for a question why wouldn't there be a marbeh b'shiurin for shechting a bigger animal? But Rav Gross was suggesting to be machalik that the netilas neshama doesn't matter how big something is it's the same netilas neshama either way. But that's the Minchas Chinuch's kasha. Okay, so up to Mishna. I shacheit b'magal yad. Let's say you shecht with a sickle. And there's two sides to a sickle. One side is very smooth and one side is the serrated bumpy side. Or you shecht b'tzor with with a sharp rock. Or b'kana with a sharpened reed. Shchitaso k'sheira. Which the Gemara is going to explain exactly what this strange phraseology means. Khuts, where is there going to be a problem? Mimago katsir, except for the sickle that you harvest with. Uba geira, a saw. Shinayim, or teeth. And vatziperen, or a nail. Why? Because with the shinayim and kankim, those things all have like serrated edges, and there's going to be a potential problem of ikur for these kinds of shritos. Now, the Gemara is medayek, ha shaychet, which sounds like you already did it. Di'eved in lekhatchila lay, that you can't lekhatchila shacht with a magal yad. Now, bishlema with a magal yad, I get why you can't shacht with a magal yad because it's got two sides to it. And therefore, there's what to be khashish, that dilma osi leme'ed bidakisa. The smooth side should be fine for shchita, but the other side could be problematic cuz it has got serrated edges. And therefore, I can understand why only be the eved kasher to shacht with, but lekhatchila don't shacht with that kind of a thing. And Rashi speaks out, we also explain a longer knife that part of it has a pugam, even if you're not going to use that part of the knife, it makes sense that that such a gezeira would exist. Ela let sorav akana lekhatchila lay, but what about these other kinds of instruments? The rock, the reed. Why can't I just shacht with them lekhatchila? Ver amini, in fact, in the braisa says, bakol shachtin, bein betulash, bein bemekhuber, bein she'as kan lemala betzav bein lemata, or bein she'as kan lemata betzav bein lemala. But you certainly see that even though it's attached, it's still going to be kasher to use for shchita. So, money, who's that tana? Lay Rebbi, velay Rebbi Khiya. Ee, Rebbi Khiya, we said di'eved lekhatchila lay. And this braisa says lekhatchila. And ee, Rebbi, well, di'eved nami lay. According to Rebbi, you can't shacht with anything that's mekhuber, even bidi'eved. To which the Gemara says, layelam Rebbi Khiya, ve'afilu lekhatchila. And how's that shayach? The haide kamisli bidi'eved, and this that Rebbi Khiya and Rebbi had a makhlokes bidi'eved lekhatchila, that's why di'eved kasher. How do you understand the braisa bakol shachtin, bein betulash, bein bemekhuber, bein she'as kan lemala betzav bein lemata, or bein she'as kan lemata betzav bein lemala? But you certainly see that even though it's attached, it's still going to be kasher to use for shchita. So, money, who's that tana? Lay Rebbi, velay Rebbi Khiya. Ee, Rebbi Khiya, we said di'eved lekhatchila lay. And this braisa says lekhatchila. And ee, Rebbi, well, di'eved nami lay. According to Rebbi, you can't shacht with anything that's mekhuber, even bidi'eved. To which the Gemara says, layelam Rebbi Khiya, ve'afilu lekhatchila. And how's that shayach? The haide kamisli bidi'eved, and this that Rebbi Khiya and Rebbi had a makhlokes bidi'eved lekhatchila, that's why di'eved that says that it's going to be possible if it's so and Ruby here another problem though the other our mission which sounds like the other like so money like Ruby cuz you feel like you Ruby so you taking care of the mission which is Ruby here feel like you mission and this that our mission which sounds like it's the other me Ruby if it's Ruby cuz you Ruby cuz our mission is saying it's Ruby says it's going to be possible with the other like kind of and kind of the other kind of kind of talking about where it was and it's staying but kind of the other it's but originally it was in such a case then it'll be okay and we're still in the middle of this discussion but we're going to pause here and pick it up tomorrow's see you later.